“Robo Umps” Coming to all AAA Ballparks in 2023

[DJL44]

8 hours ago, Nine of twelve said:

The burden of proof is on you to show that this is true, which I don't think is the case.

A strike - at the root of the rule- is a hittable pitch. A ball is an unhittable pitch. What is or isn't a hittable pitch changes based on the height of the athlete.

The original rule for a strike (before 1870)

1. A ball struck at and missed by the Batsman without its touching his bat.
2. A ball legally delivered by the Pitcher and with in the legitimate reach of the bat not swung at by the Batsman.

You want to up-end the second part of the rule and allow for strikes that are not "within the legitimate reach of the bat".

Baseball History: 19th Century Baseball: The Rules: History of the Strike (19cbaseball.com)

[Nine of twelve]

1 hour ago, DJL44 said:

A strike - at the root of the rule- is a hittable pitch. A ball is an unhittable pitch. What is or isn't a hittable pitch changes based on the height of the athlete.

The original rule for a strike (before 1870)

1. A ball struck at and missed by the Batsman without its touching his bat.
2. A ball legally delivered by the Pitcher and with in the legitimate reach of the bat not swung at by the Batsman.

You want to up-end the second part of the rule and allow for strikes that are not "within the legitimate reach of the bat".

Baseball History: 19th Century Baseball: The Rules: History of the Strike (19cbaseball.com)

If you are going to bring up the topic of rules no longer in effect you should at least be complete. From the rules of that time:

"Should the pitcher repeatedly fail to deliver to the striker fair balls, for the apparent purpose of delaying the game, or for any other cause, the umpire, after warning him, shall call one ball, and if the pitcher persists in such action, two and three balls; when three balls shall have been called, the striker shall be entitled to the first base; and should any base be occupied at that time, each player occupying them shall be entitled to one base without being put out."

Batters decided if pitches were too high or too low. A ball was called after the third unfair pitch, meaning that 9 "unhittable" pitches were required for a base on balls.

It's easy to see why the rules that you cite were scrapped. It's interesting to read about this from a historical perspective but that game is quite literally not the same game as modern baseball and that renders the rules of that era irrelevant for this discussion.

[DJL44]

9 minutes ago, Nine of twelve said:

This is irrelevant. If you want to cite rules that haven't been in effect for 150 years then you should also include the rule that a baserunner not touching a base is out when struck by a ball thrown by a fielder.

It's completely relevant. If you just want the pitcher to hit a target, that's cricket, not baseball. The oval shaped strike zone called by umpires substitutes less hittable pitches in the corners for more hittable pitches over the plate. They're mentally substituting the "rule book strike zone" with "was the pitch hittable".

The other problem your proposed rule has is it makes major league baseball a very different game than amateur baseball. Amateur baseball will never have an automated strike zone and will have to continue with the rule as written today. It will be even more difficult to figure out which 16 year old from Venezuela will be the best hitter in the majors. It also is a huge break with the past - players who are currently all-stars with huge contracts would become overnight washouts.

If they make the strike zone a fixed zone I probably stop watching major league baseball.

[Nine of twelve]

4 hours ago, DJL44 said:

The other problem your proposed rule has is it makes major league baseball a very different game than amateur baseball. Amateur baseball will never have an automated strike zone and will have to continue with the rule as written today. It will be even more difficult to figure out which 16 year old from Venezuela will be the best hitter in the majors.

Point well taken, although I think any baseball player capable of playing professional baseball will have the ability to adapt to a different zone.

[Joey Self]

6 hours ago, DJL44 said:

 

If they make the strike zone a fixed zone I probably stop watching major league baseball.

[Joey Self]

As a proponent of the electronic strike zone, I do not want Altuve and Judge having the same zone.  The computer should be able to make that adjustment, or a human make it. 

JcS

[Nine of twelve]

I still think a standard uniform strike zone in professional baseball is the way to go once an automated system is in use from the major leagues all the way down through rookie ball. I certainly realize that this position is not universally held and never will be but I have enjoyed the spirited discussion and I want to thank everyone who participated.